Jump to content
emccabe

ukraine military vs russia

Recommended Posts

By the way, it is surprising to me how key points like tough buildings are important. Dozens of tubes can't destroy that new and old terminal buildings. Militia had taken a building complex - they had to leave it in few hours, as walls collapsed. And most of modern buildings with glass walls are traps for infantry.

Yes, it is clear that some buildings are as useful to infantry as cardboard boxes. Others are much better. The terminal buildings are, probably like in the West, built mostly of cheap materials designed more for protecting people from weather than anything else.

Papers are easy to print. Or to steal a real ones. Or to buy. SBU are paid for something, right? :)

Again, you are conveniently ignoring other facts. Let me spell this out specifically:

1. The presence of the 76th Pskov (and other Russian military units) in Ukraine was reported by activists

2. Ukraine announces it hit a Russian convoy with artillery

3. Ukraine forces recovered vehicles, reports, personal equipment, and other things from the destroyed column. It identified everything as part of 76th Pskov. It included a roster of names.

4. Russian social media was examined and many of the names on the roster were found to be of soldiers from 76th Pskov. Some were identified as dead based on posts from friends.

5. New graves appear in Pskov of at least two soldiers on the list. Family confirms they died in Ukraine.

6. The Russian minister of defense travels to Pskov and awards the 76th Pskov with a combat award for bravery. When asked how this could be since the unit is "not in combat" he said it is for past times (which would be in Soviet days).

7. Russian reporters interview Russian soldiers that survived the artillery strike, including one who specifically told how one of the newly buried soldiers died.

8. Pskov politician asks Russian government to explain. He is beaten up and in hospital with bad injuries.

9. BBC news crew tries to interview the people involved, but they are stopped by unidentified men who beat them and steal all their equipment.

10. The Pskov politician manages to get a letter from the Russian government that states that the dead from the 76th Pskov died in combat while operating as a unit of the Russian Army. But it refused to say where because of national security.

And this is only one example. There are many, many, many others.

Well... I must say... Ukrainian bloggers and the SBU are far more capable than I could ever have imagined! How powerful they must be to get the Russian minister of defense to participate in the fake stories! Wow! And they managed to insert agents into Russia to beat up BBC camera crews trying to cover the fake stories! Wow again! Of course Russian independent journalists are all agents of Ukraine, so it explains the faked interviews with "Russian soldiers" and "family". The faked documents from the combat zone are child's play for these people. Man, there is just no end to the skills of the Ukrainians! I wonder if Putin is on Ukraine's payroll too?

Well, I said that "vacationers" - probably true.

Putin himself said this. It's one of the few things that Putin said that I believe.

If Ukrainians would say true, not lying about "Special force brigades" e.t.c., they would be 10 times more effective in propaganda. But they can't - bad habit since Maidan.

And Russian government lies are a bad habit since Lenin.

Ukraine's government is doing much better in terms of reporting truth than it was 10 months ago. There are major changes in the government because people have demanded more accountability and accuracy. The Lustration Law's application is not perfect, but thousands of bad officials were kicked out of their positions. The leadership of the Ukrainian military and security services has been changed several times. They still have a long way to go, but the Ukrainian activists are doing an excellent job keeping things moving in the right direction this time.

This is not the case in Russia. Repression has increased, transparency has decreased. The government had the audacity to invade Crimea and say it wasn't there even though anybody with even one eye could see that it was a complete and utter lie. Yet you choose to believe the Russian story about Ukraine. Well, that is your choice.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ukraine's government is doing much better in terms of reporting truth than it was 10 months ago. There are major changes in the government because people have demanded more accountability and accuracy. The Lustration Law's application is not perfect, but thousands of bad officials were kicked out of their positions. The leadership of the Ukrainian military and security services has been changed several times. They still have a long way to go, but the Ukrainian activists are doing an excellent job keeping things moving in the right direction this time.

This is not the case in Russia. Repression has increased, transparency has decreased. The government had the audacity to invade Crimea and say it wasn't there even though anybody with even one eye could see that it was a complete and utter lie. Yet you choose to believe the Russian story about Ukraine. Well, that is your choice.

Steve

I am a bit new to this discussion and I have not had a chance to read all 33 pages of it, so please forgive me if I re-stating somebody's point; but here it goes...

While your supporting evidence for Russian military involvement in Eastern Ukraine (at least for a short period in August) and their efforts to deny it is spot on; your blissful belief in the accuracy and transparency of Ukrainian reporting on this crisis is naive at best and bypassed at worse. I would be very curious to know what sources you use to form your understanding of what's going on there. Are you fluent in Russian and Ukrainian? What exactly gives you an idea that the Ukrainians are any more honest and transparent in their reporting of this conflict than the Russians? I find it very difficult to see a good side to support here (and that includes the US and EU); I would be very curious as to what research you have done to form your opinion....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these numbers are a fantasy... that's more than 1000 casualties in a few days... if the russian paratroopers and GRU spetznaz backed by armor suffered such a fate ... the Motorola unit would have been obliterated by now. In the pictures of the documents on the ukrainian site.. you can read.. interestingly.. a reference to an RQ-11 raven. Anyway, any site that talks about Putin the dictator, terrorists (for the Ukrainian side) or Fascist pigs (sites that cover the war on the side of the DPR and Novorossiya) is suspect.

Russians are there, for sure. But that they suffered such levels of casualties is quite unbelievable. It's very simple, these fake numbers are meant to demoralize the Russian public and lower support for Putin. Fair game. They also know that the old soviet habit of suspicion towards the government works in their favor. They can lie all they want and chances are something will stick and will have an effect. The commitees for the mothers of soldiers are also suspect. There were casualties of course, this is war and they operate without all their force multipliers and the bells and whistles (and their new toys) but if you believe those numbers I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you for a good price ;)

I fully respect your sense of history and the fact that you predicted many things but I could predict them myself (and did). In fact, I was surprised that the Russians were so subtle and nimble, I expected a more robust and brutal response to this whole Ukraine mess. The strategic narrative is pretty easy to get if you know what to look for among the propaganda, but operational details are way more difficult to get right in such an intense disinformation rich environment. Good judgment will only get you so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

antaress, who exactly are you responding to? It really helps to quote the post you're replying to so others can understand more clearly what sort of argument you're trying to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
antaress, who exactly are you responding to? It really helps to quote the post you're replying to so others can understand more clearly what sort of argument you're trying to make.

He is referencing the Inforesist site link that Steve posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
these numbers are a fantasy... that's more than 1000 casualties in a few days... if the russian paratroopers and GRU spetznaz backed by armor suffered such a fate ... the Motorola unit would have been obliterated by now. In the pictures of the documents on the ukrainian site.. you can read.. interestingly.. a reference to an RQ-11 raven. Anyway, any site that talks about Putin the dictator, terrorists (for the Ukrainian side) or Fascist pigs (sites that cover the war on the side of the DPR and Novorossiya) is suspect.

Russians are there, for sure. But that they suffered such levels of casualties is quite unbelievable. It's very simple, these fake numbers are meant to demoralize the Russian public and lower support for Putin. Fair game. They also know that the old soviet habit of suspicion towards the government works in their favor. They can lie all they want and chances are something will stick and will have an effect. The commitees for the mothers of soldiers are also suspect. There were casualties of course, this is war and they operate without all their force multipliers and the bells and whistles (and their new toys) but if you believe those numbers I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you for a good price ;)

I fully respect your sense of history and the fact that you predicted many things but I could predict them myself (and did). In fact, I was surprised that the Russians were so subtle and nimble, I expected a more robust and brutal response to this whole Ukraine mess. The strategic narrative is pretty easy to get if you know what to look for among the propaganda, but operational details are way more difficult to get right in such an intense disinformation rich environment. Good judgment will only get you so far.

You make very good points, and I would generally agree with everything you've said; except for one distinction - there is absolutely no credible evidence that Russian regulars are in East Ukraine right now or more-so that they are directly involved in any fighting there. It was a different story in August of this year; but it very much appears that they had in fact left once their immediate objectives were accomplished. Yes Russian government has flat out lied about it and has tried to keep their actions as conspicuous as possible; but that does not all of a sudden mean that we should put any more stock into the claims of their Ukrainian counterparts who had shown themselves to be equally deceitful...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equally deceitful? Which tree did you fall from? ;)

Guys, before you start posting about this topic I would encourage you to go through all this thread ad to not make an ass out of yourselves.

Steve has been a winner in this debate so far with his arguments. Contra arguments have been weak so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Equally deceitful? Which tree did you fall from? ;)

Guys, before you start posting about this topic I would encourage you to go through all this thread ad to not make an ass out of yourselves.

Steve has been a winner in this debate so far with his arguments. Contra arguments have been weak so far.

I have read the entire thread, I have also read his sources in the original language, my native tongue. Inforesist has been a quite deceitful source since the beginning of its existence. Citing this site as a source is no better than using Cassad as one.

Yes, all sides in this conflict have been equally deceitful. Probably the only truth in this whole affair is everyone is twisting the truth if not outright telling lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are entitled to your opinion of course. But it's still an opinion.

An opinion that is bolstered by supported facts that Steve has pretty clearly laid out over the past 20 pages, if you're going to try and disprove it your going to have to do better than "Ukraine lies as much as Russia".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Equally deceitful? Which tree did you fall from? ;)

Guys, before you start posting about this topic I would encourage you to go through all this thread ad to not make an ass out of yourselves.

Steve has been a winner in this debate so far with his arguments. Contra arguments have been weak so far.

Sorry bud, but I am a "grown-ass" man I do not have the time nor the inclination to go through 33 pages of debates that have already been aired on other forums for many months.

Yes, Ukranian authorities have just as little credibility in their reporting as Russians in my book. I really don't care to recite all the BS that they had claimed so I'll give myself exactly 30 seconds to see what comes to mind:

-The attack on the civilians around Lugansk city council was done by a separatist SAM launcher that had locked on to the air conditioner; not the SU-25 that was filmed firing on it by multiple sources

-Russians had used nuclear munitions on Lugansk airport

-Russians are shelling Donetsk airport from Russian territory (at least 70km away)

-All (yes All) civilian casualties and damage has been done by the separatists (nay terrorists per Ukrainian officials) bombing themselves and their families

-There are dozens of Russian units in east Ukraine at any given time (even though half of them don't even exist in real life - 200th GRU Spetsnaz brigade)

That's it. My 30 seconds are over. That's all you get for now bud. Now I have to climb back to my tree so that great experts like yourself that know everything that goes on there with 100% certainty could educate the rest of us on what we are incapable of comprehending without your divine analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Just to point out, indeed remind people, that there is a perfectly respectable alternative view of the events in the Ukraine to those the majority here hold.

If you have access to or can gain access to the current issue of Jane’s Defence Weekly you will find that their analysis of events is closer in some ways the minority view on this forum.

Very much looking forward to CMBS :),

We are lucky Steve and Charles didn’t decide to developed Space Lobsters ;),

All the best,

Kip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An opinion that is bolstered by supported facts that Steve has pretty clearly laid out over the past 20 pages, if you're going to try and disprove it your going to have to do better than "Ukraine lies as much as Russia".

I have a ton of respect for Steve, but he is a subject to his own biases and information availability (or the lack of such) - just like any of us. This debate has already been played out in hundreds of other forums across the net, so I am sorry but I am not going to go through 20 pages of arguments that I have already been exposed over-and-over for the past year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's war. War consists of more than armies fighting each other. War touches on all aspects of life. For that reason, misinformation is created to manipulate people's opinion. Lies and half-truths are told. This happens by both sides. This has always been like that during war and this will always be like that in the future. So, don't be surprised by it.

I can second the claim that Kiev has told a lot of lies. Maybe not as much as Moscow but still pretty close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's war. War consists of more than armies fighting each other. War touches on all aspects of life. For that reason, misinformation is created to manipulate people's opinion. Lies and half-truths are told. This happens by both sides. This has always been like that during war and this will always be like that in the future. So, don't be surprised by it.

I can second the claim that Kiev has told a lot of lies. Maybe not as much as Moscow but still pretty close.

Agreed 100%. Mike drop, case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry bud, but I am a "grown-ass" man I do not have the time nor the inclination to go through 33 pages of debates that have already been aired on other forums for many months.

Could you please give me the links to those forums? It seems to me as if there an alternative point of view is more present. I'd like to take a look at that point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you please give me the links to those forums? It seems to me as if there an alternative point of view is more present. I'd like to take a look at that point of view.

This is the one that I have followed and tried to contribute to the most, until I had come to a conclusion that it was taking up too much of my time and was not leading to a constructive debate... but there is plenty of good info and opposing views there:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?236054

I am sure that they are plenty other ones on Reddit and such...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the primary problem. Russia is lying as part of state policy. Meaning, there is no interest in producing statements of truth because inherently it is waging war in Ukraine against the people of Ukraine. This is not the case with Ukraine's government. Their position, which is that this is not a civil war but a war of Russian aggression, is 100% factually provable. To summarize:

Russian government official position -> "we are not involved in Ukraine at all"

Ukrainian government official position -> "Russia is directly responsible for the violence in Ukraine"

The Russian position is an inherent lie. Which means everything the Russian government says is designed to continue that lie. That does not mean everything Russia says is a lie, but whatever truths they do state are in support of the big lie.

The Ukrainian position is inherently the truth. Which means everything the Ukrainian government says is designed to support the truth. That does not mean everything Ukraine says is true, but whatever lies they do state are in support of the truth.

On top of this the Russian media is overwhelmingly controlled by the Russian government. Foreign reporting is discouraged, and in fact new laws have been enacted to reduce foreign journalism within Russia. This is the opposite case in Ukraine.

This is absolutely the case. Anybody can have an opinion contrary to this as it is their right to do so. Just like someone can have the opinion that the world is flat or Budweiser is the King of Beers. But an opinion that is based on wishful thinking or knee jerk dismissive responses isn't very impressive.

One of the things I have found frustrating in this discussion is that a lot has changed since February. This conflict is evolving and yet some people seem to think it's been static. That is a major error to make.

The two big issues raised here about Ukraine specifically are:

1. Military performance

2. Accuracy of government information

I spent many pages going through the military performance in detail because a few people insisted on judging Ukraine's military of today by what happened in May or June. That shows someone hasn't been paying attention.

Similar with the Ukrainian government information. I said, very deliberately, that it is improving and is now generally OK. Early on it was the opposite. Friendly casualties were underreported, enemy casualties were over reported. The government made claims of places it secured that it did not have secured. I lost track of how many times they claimed they sealed off the border when the fact was they had control over very little of it. Etc.

But things are different now. The government itself has changed dramatically since the Spring. Many of the people who were in charge of military and civilian affairs have been fired or arrested. These are good changes and they are having a positive effect on government performance. But there is still a LONG way to go (as the unfolding coal scandal proves).

Does this mean I think everything Russia says is a lie and everything Ukraine says is true? Absolutely not. I don't think like that at all, ever. My government (USA) lies and distorts the truth pretty frequently too, which means I am very conscious about supporting evidence. Ukraine's government has a bad track record in the past, so I judge them more harshly than I do my own. But Russia's government? It has credibility similar to North Korea and Iran. So by comparison, my view of Ukraine's positions are definitely more favorable simply because the facts say that it should be.

Steve

P.S. notice I am not talking about bloggers or other online type sources. There the picture gets VERY murky VERY quickly. Though I know information on websites like Inforesist needs to be scrutinized heavily, saying it is the same as the tripe that Colonel Cassad writes is not accurate in the least. Both sources are obviously biased, but Colonel Cassad's only purpose is to promote a lie while Inforesit's is to promote a truth. They can both be accurate or inaccurate, truthful or deceitful, but in the end Cassad's purpose is to support a lie. That difference is important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's war. War consists of more than armies fighting each other. War touches on all aspects of life. For that reason, misinformation is created to manipulate people's opinion. Lies and half-truths are told. This happens by both sides. This has always been like that during war and this will always be like that in the future. So, don't be surprised by it.

Well said. There is also a distinction to be made in war between disinformation and misinformation. Disinformation is stuff that was publicized by people who know it isn't true. The intent is to deliberately mislead people. Misinformation is stuff that comes from the "fog of war", which includes honest but incorrect information from first and second hand sources. The intent is to inform people of the truth, but for various reasons it fails that standard.

Example of disinformation -> "those Green Men in Crimea are local volunteers of self defense forces" (reality they are Russian Army and Marines)

Example of misinformation -> "our forces destroyed 300 enemy separatists and seized 2 towns" (reality is 30 casualties and parts of 2 towns taken)

The first example is a lie from start to finish. There is no other way to describe it. The second example might be a lie, but could possibly be the higher officials thought they were telling the truth, but lower echelon commanders "puffed up" numbers to make themselves look good. In the end both statements do not reflect reality, but the motivations and circumstances are inherently different.

A responsible government works hard to ensure that it is telling the truth. They are supposed to evaluate the accuracy of internal information before making it official. Ukraine has had serious problems with this in the past because of their Soviet legacy. But Ukraine is getting better.

I can second the claim that Kiev has told a lot of lies. Maybe not as much as Moscow but still pretty close.

Not even close in my opinion. Russia is waging a war of aggression against its neighbor and it is saying it is not. Whenever evidence is brought forward that Russia is lying, what happens next? Russia admits the obvious truth? No, it has to engage in more lies. That is the inherent result of making such a big lie. Ukraine has done nothing even close to that.

For every outrageous claim that the Ukrainian government has made I can probably point to a half dozen made by the separatist and Russian government side. And since the separatists are a product of official Russian government policy, their lies count as if they are from Russia itself IMHO. When you illegally give someone a gun, you are as responsible for their crimes as if you used the gun yourself.

Oh, and there's something else that seems to be forgotten here. There are many Ukrainians who are exposing the lies of their own government. Not just bloggers, but lower officials and especially field commanders of National Guard and Army units. They are getting national coverage when they present charges of government incompetency and disinformation. And as a result the government is, slowly, learning that they can no longer easily get away with sloppy or deliberately deceitful reporting. This is the opposite in Russia where independent voices are being silenced more than ever.

In fact, I'd say most of the Ukrainian government lies I've seen uncovered have come from Ukrainian reporting and not Russian. Russian reporting tends to repeat what the Ukrainians themselves are saying. This is significant.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's the primary problem. Russia is lying as part of state policy. Meaning, there is no interest in producing statements of truth because inherently it is waging war in Ukraine against the people of Ukraine. This is not the case with Ukraine's government. Their position, which is that this is not a civil war but a war of Russian aggression, is 100% factually provable. To summarize:

Russian government official position -> "we are not involved in Ukraine at all"

Ukrainian government official position -> "Russia is directly responsible for the violence in Ukraine"

I mostly agree with the rest of your post so I will just try to address this part. The assumption that the Russians are waging a war against the people of Ukraine is just as subjective as an assumption that the Ukrainian government is waging a war against their own (possibly-former) people in Eastern Ukraine. If you honestly believe that the majority of Donbass locals support the Kiev regime and see Russians as the aggressors; I can respect your opinion (especially given the news coverage that we get here), but I also find it completely unsubstantiated (given the Ukrainian, Russian, and Donbass sources). It's just as short-sighted as saying that we (US) were waging a war against the people of Iraq (or Libya, or Afghanistan, or now Syria - take your pick). It's a complex scenario where Russians (and US, and EU) are acting in their national interests; but saying that one side has any kind of moral authority over the other (or doing something that we ourselves would not have done under the same circumstances) is extremely subjective and biased in my humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You make very good points, and I would generally agree with everything you've said; except for one distinction - there is absolutely no credible evidence that Russian regulars are in East Ukraine right now or more-so that they are directly involved in any fighting there.

Actually, there is. The problem you might have is the only source of information that this is true is coming from Ukrainian sources. If you do not believe SBU and field command reports, then of course that presents a problem. Especially because there's no alternative source worth mentioning at the moment. Russia says it is not involved at all and there are no trustworthy journalists operating in the separatist side. OSCE is supposed to be monitoring the truce, but their observers have been shot at by separatists and their observation drones disrupted by Russian (not separatist) counter measures.

It was a different story in August of this year; but it very much appears that they had in fact left once their immediate objectives were accomplished.

For sure the bulk of Russian military forces involved in the August counter offensive moved into Ukraine explicitly for that action. When it was over, they left. But there were Russian military forces in Ukraine before then (76th Pskov the most documented example) and it is naive to think that Russia has suddenly removed all forces since. The majority? Yes, but not all.

Yes Russian government has flat out lied about it and has tried to keep their actions as conspicuous as possible; but that does not all of a sudden mean that we should put any more stock into the claims of their Ukrainian counterparts who had shown themselves to be equally deceitful...

I agree that Ukrainian claims must be examined with skepticism. Just because the official policy of Russia is to lie through their teeth that doesn't mean that everything Ukraine claims is true. But despite Ukraine's lies and distorted information, their track record of presenting truthful information is solid. Put another way, at some points in the war Ukraine presents a pile of crap information that has nuggets of gold in it. The fact that the nuggets are covered in crap doesn't change the fact that the nuggets are gold.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Example of disinformation -> "those Green Men in Crimea are local volunteers of self defense forces" (reality they are Russian Army and Marines)

Example of misinformation -> "our forces destroyed 300 enemy separatists and seized 2 towns" (reality is 30 casualties and parts of 2 towns taken)

I get your point, and I certainly don't care to defend Russian misinformation, but what about "The civilians in Lugansk had died due to their own MANPAD locking on to the nearby AC unit", rather than a strafing run by a Ukrainian SU-25 that was documented by multiple sources? Is that disinformation or misinformation? Does it really matter, and can a government that pulls that kind of sh$$t time after time claim any moral superiority? And there are hundreds of other examples like that as you well know...

A responsible government works hard to ensure that it is telling the truth. They are supposed to evaluate the accuracy of internal information before making it official. Ukraine has had serious problems with this in the past because of their Soviet legacy. But Ukraine is getting better.

Which world do you live in my friend? I love my country to death, but by your definition our government is extremely irresponsible, and so is any other one that cares enough to protect its national interests to protect... Russians are not that different from us in this sense and all that Soviet legacy BS has very little to do with it. If our power elites decide that we need to escalate our commitment Vietnam - we get the Gulf o Tokin BS. If they decide that we need to invade Iraq - we get the WMD BS. And you know what, I get it - that's how the geopolitics are played; but let's not pretend that we play that game any differently from others. I just hope that we play it better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mostly agree with the rest of your post so I will just try to address this part. The assumption that the Russians are waging a war against the people of Ukraine is just as subjective as an assumption that the Ukrainian government is waging a war against their own (possibly-former) people in Eastern Ukraine.

I am glad we are mostly in agreement, but you are correct we are very much in disagreement on this point.

If you honestly believe that the majority of Donbass locals support the Kiev regime and see Russians as the aggressors; I can respect your opinion (especially given the news coverage that we get here), but I also find it completely unsubstantiated (given the Ukrainian, Russian, and Donbass sources).

I do not believe the majority of people in Donbass supported the change in power in Kiev. Partly because they were subjected to massive propaganda on Russian state media that deliberately distorted what was happening in Kiev before and after Maidan. However, based on what I've seen, the majority of people in Donbass do not support a military confrontation on their soil regardless of their opinion of the Kiev government. Which means Russia is waging a war on Ukrainian soil against the Ukrainian government without the popular support of the local people. Especially now that the local people have probably discovered that the initial Russian propaganda was not a fair reflection of reality and the forces that Russia deliberately unleashed on them are far worse.

And let's not forget that the majority of people in Donbass have fled the war zone.

It's just as short-sighted as saying that we (US) were waging a war against the people of Iraq (or Libya, or Afghanistan, or now Syria - take your pick). It's a complex scenario where Russians (and US, and EU) are acting in their national interests; but saying that one side has any kind of moral authority over the other (or doing something that we ourselves would not have done under the same circumstances) is extremely subjective and biased in my humble opinion.

No, it shouldn't be subjective. Russia planned this war in Ukraine for years ahead of time. They put agents in place and established close ties with Ukrainian oligarchs, politicians, and criminals (often one in the same!). They were put there explicitly in case the government in Kiev, the one Russia was indirectly controlling, finally managed to fall to political and social forces opposed to it. The will and well being of the Donbass people was *NEVER* part of the equation. NEVER. This was always about Russian goals being achieved by any means necessary.

The situation in eastern Ukraine is not the result or the fault of Kiev government policy. Yet it has to respond to it. Any nation state that allows a foreign government to invade its territory has a legal and moral obligation to resist to the extent possible. That is the primary purpose of the national government.

Which is to say that the people of Donbass are caught in the middle between a foreign government that is deliberately using them for their own political purposes, and the domestic government that is obligated to oppose the action. If you don't think Kiev would rather be focused on fixing it's economy and governance than fighting a war on top of that, you are greatly mistaken.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...